We're just here to get to know the candidates and ask questions regarding the candidates views on moderation that may help in voting.

A few notes about the format:

The format is open, feel free to ask your question(s) unprompted, however please be mindful of whether or not candidates have answered the previous questions so that they don't get behind and start missing questions. Other than that, feel free to jump in.

Candidates, please use the reply feature so that questions and their answers are linked together. (Hover your mouse over the left of the message, click the down arrow, click reply)

When a question is asked, I'll star it - please star it yourself also to help! Please save stars for the questions so that candidates can refer to the star list to make sure they haven't missed a question.

We will be creating a digest version of the town hall chat after it is completed. This digest will take the form of a question on meta, containing all the questions asked as well as their answers for easier reading.

There's a system message up on the site, so we may get some stragglers joining us.

@MarkTrapp I think it's going in the right direction. There's always plenty of things to do, though. I see the blog being discussed again. You (Mark) have a great idea for keeping tag cleanups organized so they can continue. I would like to see some topicality cleanup, though, to reduce some ambiguities.

@MarkTrapp Well, I have no idea if it will be the right direction in the long run, but I like where we are heading. We do need a lot of work, especially with cleaning up our broken windows. Lately we've been doing a lot of work clarifying the FAQ, there's always room for improvement, but I think we are very near "good enough"...

@MarkTrapp I think it is a little of both. Mostly the right direction, we've risen out the quagmire that was the beginning of the site but we are still seen as rather brutal or elitist toward new users even if that response is warranted. We also get great deal of misunderstanding in terms of the site's purpose and scope. Getting Stack Overflow to quit using us as a dumping ground is definitely a top priority. Getting some kind of extremely clear "algorithmic" asking guide should be done.

@AnnaLear I just feel that there is not a true consensus on where the line is drawn in the sand. There are guidelines, and they are largely fine, but it seems as though what one may consider fine another considers off-topic is not certain.

@MarkTrapp I'm still here, so I'm quite happy. On/Off topic has been a controversy for a long time, for better or worse. At best it keeps a focus on certain topics, at worst it can drive away some topics and askers that are programming/programmer related that are very interesting and insightful.

@ChrisF No affect. I upvote what I feel is interesting, I vote to close what I feel is off-topic. It's likely that I'll upvote an interesting question, and vote to close as off-topic. I downvote what I feel is harmful or very ill-informed.

@ChrisF I don't know that it will really change them all that much. I will provide more detail about why I post, I will definitely think more before I take action on bad posts as my actions will now reflect the community rather than just me. My posting will stay about the same, I'll answer when I have an answer and ask a question when I have one.

@ChrisF I don't see it doesn't affect my answering or voting that much. It won't affect the content of any answers, that's for sure. Depending on the current state of the site, I might choose to moderate instead of answer, and if someone else posts a really good answer before I get a chance to answer, I'll just comment and upvote.

@Morons I think our name is partially to blame, this is not "Software Engineering.SE". I do think we could address that with more specifics in the FAQ and maybe something along the lines of a "question of the week" and set it to architecture topics for a while.

@AnnaLear It depends on just how far. If it is total mismatch for the site, I would be inclined to close/migrate/delete depending on the context. If it is a "fringe" question, I say let the community be the judge on that one.

How can we get more users involved in community efforts? For example, it was mentioned earlier that we'll have more organized tag clean-up. How can we encourage newer/younger members (such as myself) to participate?

@Morons I don't know if there's anything that you can do to force questions. Perhaps looking at themed weeks for asking and answering questions in a particular category might be an answer, as it has worked on other SE sites. However, I want to make sue the questions stay real and not forced or pressured.

@AnnaLear I think it's pretty clear to everyone that moderators are supposed to be the one's making the unpopular decisions. If I honestly believe that a question is outside the scope of the site, or otherwise troublesome, I will close it. If it's a borderline question, I'll probably wait for a couple of close votes or a few flags. If there's anywhere else it fits, I'll probably ask their mods before migrating.

@AnnaLear I'll try and address the question if it a near miss, get the poster to change it to something acceptable. Otherwise I will go ahead and purge it if it is way off base whilst providing a precise reason as to why.

@AnnaLear If it's extremely obvious or needs action, I would close or delete as appropriate. However, I would tend to defer to the community. I don't want to be the only close vote on a question, though, unless it's absolutely necessary - I think seeing questions closed by fewer than 3 non-moderators looks bad (it isn't in actuality, but has that appearance).

@BlackJack A great many users don't check meta from what I can tell so it might behoove us to have some way of encouraging meta discussion. I do think leading by example is important but at the same time we have a lot of veteran users who are already active on meta. I think meta needs to seem to matter to new users in a way that it may not now.

@BlackJack I agree with @GlennNelson - lead by example. Setting down good examples is the best way. That means moderators and non-moderators alike. Even if I don't get a diamond mod position, I still plan on helping with cleanups, writing tag wikis, meta discussions, and the blog.

@YannisRizos - It's pretty clear to everyone that moderators are supposed to be the one's making the unpopular decisions? Isn't that a logical contradiction? If it's clear to everyone isn't it popular by definition? What do you mean?

@RobertHarvey I'm going to try to defer to the community as much as I can. For example, minimizing the number of times I close a question without at least two or three other members voting first, or if I notice a trend, raise a question on Meta.

@RobertHarvey I refuse to use downvotes and I try to explain in detail why things happen and what to do about them if it is possible to do something about it. I want questions to be answered even if they are bad fits. I do realize that there are people who will never be able ask a good question but I think there are a great deal more who can be shaped into good questioners. I generally refer to community will but people get angry and vindictive, as a moderator I can't let emotion cloud my judgement.

To follow @AnnaLear's question: There is an apparent dichotomy between the site being a "community" site and a site governed by a set of "guidelines." In theory, the guidelines are set by the community, so governing by the guidelines should be governing by the community. If that were actually the case, @AnnaLear's question would be meaningless. When the community, or at least a vocal subset of the community, appears to be at odds with the guidelines, how do you resolve the conflict?

@RobertHarvey Not really. It was a bit of the opposite actually. I see people that I admire for their technical skills, people skills and community involvement - and aspire to emulate it. Will my personality come through? Certainly, but I can't say how that will affect my moderating style.

@MarkTrapp When it comes to making decisions, the voice of a moderator shouldn't be any stronger than anyone else in the community. The only difference between a diamond moderator and anyone else is that they have access to tools to help keep the community moving forward in times of crisis.

@MarkTrapp The moderator should ideally be both a user and a "janitor". Any site needs some level of cleaning up, but should also be involved in promotion of the site which is just as important as cleaning in maintaining and cultivating a good community.

@MarkTrapp Moderators should act as the morale officers in the army of stack-exchange, meting out justice and encouragement in equal measure. We should be the very best that the community has to offer and try to set examples in all things. Good ideas should be taken to the next level and bad ideas should be composted into good ones or incinerated.

@Andrew The guidelines exist, and at any given moment in time, the community needs to function within those guidelines. However, if any user (moderator or otherwise) has a problem with those guidelines, it should be raised on meta and discussed. However, there's also the overarching goals/objectives of Stack Exchange that must be supported.

@BlackJack I've noticed a couple of newer users doing some great edits, so I approached them through chat and gave some basic guidelines, mostly pointing out to relevant meta discussions. I'd like to do that in a more organized effort, possibly chat events for major cleanup efforts...

@Andrew What I would like to see is more of a dialog between moderators and the rest of the community, though. These types of town halls on a regular basis. I'm just beginning to see the actual value of the chat, so I think that putting everyone in the same location at a coordinated time might help community building (and consensus building.)

@Andrew I try to get to the bottom of the reasoning behind the behavior and work out some kind of lasting solution. Care needs to be taken in both strengthening the community and living within the bounds that the stack exchange sets. It's a fine and tricky line to walk I'll admit but I feel I can handle it.

@RobertHarvey There was a similar meta question, and my answer there was that there isn't really much room for differentiation. Moderators are exception handlers and janitors, not much room for personal style...

@psr There are some guidelines in place. For example, the six guidelines for subjective questions, the desire for expert answers, and the general making the Internet a better place. Regardless of what we, as a community, decide to do, we can't break any rules or guidelines set down by a higher power.

Say a user posts 3-4 questions which are all closed for being off-topic. If this user continues posting questions that are somewhat related but still off topic, even after you show them the FAQ and all that, what do you do with them, if anything at all?

@BlackJack As far as I'm aware users who abuse the stack exchange can be banned but I'd definitely take serious care to make sure that we were doing so correctly and not just repeatedly misunderstanding each other.

@BlackJack At that point, I believe there are moderator (or automatic) methods for limiting their posting ability. It really would be required at that point. One or two questions, especially borderline ones, I can see. But after 3 or 4, you should have learned and stronger action is needed.

user2334

10:24 PM

Many of the candidates have very low flag counts and very low meta participation. Do you see flagging and meta participation as an important part of being part of the community? Why or why not?

@MarkTrapp Janitorial duties should be a priority. But moderators are also users, and they should be involved in the decision making process as much as everyone. By default (?!) moderators are experienced users and their opinion may carry a bit more weight, but that has (or should have) nothing to do with the diamond...

@MarkTrapp Flagging, not so much. I have less than 50 flags because I only flag things that need immediate or drastic action. Most of the time, the community can take care of things on their own, without moderator intervention. Meta is far more important since that's how the community is defined.

@BlackJack Tough call. I've personally had trouble adapting to the six guidelines, so in the past a number of my questions were closed. In the end, there needs to be a cut-off point where it can be determined that the person is posting maliciously and if the case, banning is an option that I'd consider with caution (depending on the content of the questions). If it's deemed not malicious, continuing to close their questions by vote of the community seems reasonable to me.

@MarkTrapp I do see flagging and meta as important. Regarding flagging, unless I saw something that was truly inappropriate, I used my "vote to close" option. Meta is what plays a role in how the site is run which I feel is more important. As for my low count on the matter, that is simply my lack of formal involvement (I've tended to lurk in the past) but regardless of the outcome of the election, I intend to become much more involved in Programmers overall.

@BlackJack @BlackJack, one thing that often happens is questions are closed for being off topic, but there's a part of the question that's on topic. I would try to edit to make it on topic, or redirect to a better place to ask, rather than just close and say "those questions aren't welcome here." Only after that doesn't work would I consider reprimands like temporary bans.

@MarkTrapp I think flagging is definitely an important task, without it, moderation would be exhausting and difficult to keep up with bad posts. It gives new users a feeling that they can stop bad stuff from happening. Meta is definitely important but as I said in reference for other questions, I post when I have a question and answer when I have an answer. I do read through meta to make sure that I'm keeping up though and encourage others to do likewise.

A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?

Some people find it important to ensure that all people who participate in a community process feel they are heard and considered, even when the final decision in a matter does not go their way. Rules of Parliamentary Procedure, for instance, are instituted in part for this reason (though not necessarily here). How will you attempt to ensure that people feel they are being heard and considered when attempting to shape the community through, for example, meta?

@MarkTrapp I have generally reserved flags for things that can't be addressed via other means, like spam or not real answers. I prefer voting to close, editing, or commenting as a means of participation in site improvement.

@BlackJack It's always a per case decision. If there are a few helpful comments by community members (moderators or not, it doesn't really matter) and the user failed to improve his / her participation after a sensible amount of time, a temporary suspension would be justified.

@Jarrod I can dedicate an hour or so in the morning, and mid-day. The evening allows for more time as well. I feel at least 2-3 hours would be a good amount for both moderation and participation in general.

@Jarrod Various SE sites are usually open in a browser when I'm at work. I pop on in when I need to jump out of work for a few minutes. SE sites are usually open when I'm at home, too. If I was on and things needed attention, or there were new interesting posts (on main or meta), I'd respond. As a diamond mod, I'd probably spend more time here than on any other SE site (I already do, but it would shift more).

@MarkTrapp As for meta, I read meta far more often than I post, mostly because there are usually sufficient answers given, or I don't feel I'm the right person to answer. If I were a moderator, I would feel like "the right person" much more often.

@MichaelMrozek I'm entirely okay with that. I've nothing to hide and I do still update some of my better old answers to make them ever more useful. I realize that I will probably be resented more by many people but being a moderator is a duty and an honor not some weekend cruise. I will put a note in my profile to treat my oldest posts with a grain of salt since I was learning the ropes here at the time as to not mislead people.

@kiamlaluno What exactly do you mean? Anyone can participate on Meta. The big thing is that as you are trusted by the community to ask good questions and give good answers, you get more tools. But everyone can participate fully in the core functionality and decision making.

@SnOrfus Typically about an hour total a day. Maybe less. I normally drop in 3-4 times a day and if something comes up I check it. That's why flags rock, it's a simple little note that I need to check something instead of digging through stats to find something.

@kiamlaluno I'm perfectly fine with that. Until someone is more familiar and comfortable with the community, there's no need to give someone access to more powerful community management/participation tools.

@MarkTrapp I see myself doing a bit of both. I like the current mods in terms of discussions I've had with them but I'm sure there will be the odd conflict in terms what should or shouldn't be done at a given point in time. Experience will be an excellent teacher.

@MichaelMrozek I've always made how my actions reflect on the site a major consideration, because I want it to be a site people come back to. I like to think I already behave as if my activity is in the spotlight, and having a diamond by my name wouldn't change that.

@MarkTrapp I think the current moderation team has done a fine job and will continue to do so. I personally don't agree on the level of closing questions that are on the margin, but I don't see that being a conflict.

@Jarrod About an hour per day, for moderation duties. So far I'm spending about a couple of hours each day, and if there's need for more time for moderation, well I'll remove Sceptics and Code Review from my bookmarks...

@MarkTrapp Depends on the moderator. I've disagreed with you personally a number of times on the site and meta, while the opposite is the case with some other mods. I've always had a good amount of respect for both however and when I haven't agreed, I've enjoyed the discussion.

@MarkTrapp I've tended to have some very...strong (good word, guys) opinions on various policies and how things should be. However, once the community makes a decision, I'll fall into line and support it as appropriate. So in a discussion, I might go against the grain, but I'd fall in line when it comes to upholding those decisions.

@AnnaLear Chat, probably not so much. If there were chat events, I would be around. I wouldn't be against more activity though. I'd be more responsive on Meta (and anyone can ping me via email if they want my input or take on a question - it's already in my profile).

@SteveJackson Tags and on-topic definition first. Broken windows, and all that. Topicality is 80% there, but there are ambiguities. Community building needs to be on going thing that's never going to be done.

@SteveJackson Tough call. The community seems to be most vocal about on-topic definition, but I don't know if it's the most important. Being an active member and contributing the best quality possible as a user is probably most important.

@MarkTrapp I think my meta answer here sums up how I will fit in perfectly. When I disagree with official policy, I will say so, but I'm still supportive of the consensus. In other words, I can disagree without being disagreeable.

@SteveJackson I think interception of bad questions before they get asked is a good idea. People ask a lot of the same bad questions over and over. Some way of providing a stock answer that doesn't feel negative along with a close would be good.

@kiamlaluno The main problem I see is a misunderstanding what it is that programmers is about. We tend to see bad posts, react to them and that gives an impression that we are elitist/evil. This in turn turns away many people who might be given valuable contributors if they could be steered in the right direction without scaring them off.

@AnnaLear I have not spent much time in chat before because honestly, there's not often much going on. If elected moderator, I would make an effort to keep a chat window open anyway, because I think that's part of the job.

@SteveJackson Have some guides ask to exactly why bad questions are bad, not just question off topic/question bad. Explain carefully why it is that there question is bad and try and help them make it better. I realize that it means more work for me but I'm willing to take that on.

A very wide range of programming topics are discussed on this site - do you feel you have a wide enough range of experience in the world of programming to appropriately guide and moderate topics that you might not necessarily be well versed in?

@MarkTrapp I want to help get this site into a form where we are no longer seen as SO's dumping ground or those meanies over on programmers. I love being on this site and feel that this is a natural next step in my service toward helping people get questions answered.

@MarkTrapp I've been a member of Programmers since Day 1. I saw it go from this confused mess of who knows to one of the most interesting SE sites out there. I just want the opportunity to take on a new role in the community to make it more awesome. Regardless of the outcome, I still plan on participating on the main site, on meta, and in community initiatives, but hopefully the community will elect me to serve them in a new way..

@AnnaLear Again I'm not sure what facilities moderators are provided to communicate with users, but I would do my best to explain my reasoning for my decision and do my best to answer questions or issues the user has with my decision.

@AnnaLear First, I'd chill out a bit. Then, I'd explain my reasoning in detail and let the community decide. If, for some reason, I was out of line, I would admit my mistake and undo it (if it hadn't been undone by another mod already).

@AnnaLear Calmly, I've worked a long time in customer service. You've not seen irate until you reject returns. If I can stand my ground with someone screaming at me in real life, I can handle it on the internet.

@Jarrod I suppose that would be a tough one on my part considering my young age and relative lack of experience in the industry. I think that largely, I can tell what is and what is not related to the world of programmers, but some times I will just have to step back and look into something if I am not sure of something or knowledgeable on the matter.

@SteveJackson We haven't fully recuperated from the good old days, so I'd say that on-topic definition would be my first priority, but cleaning up our broken windows would be the best way to start. I've already volunteered for the blog as a user, and will do my best to be as much involved as a moderator, if elected.

@Jarrod I think so. I think I would bring a unique perspective to the moderation team in terms of my topic area knowledge to help better define topicality in gray areas. And if I see a gray area, I'd defer to the community members and moderators who understands the subject matter better to make an informed decision.

@Jarrod I don't think anyone knows everything, but someone has to do the job of moderating. I don't necessarily think it's a moderator's job to verify the accuracy of all questions and answers. That said, I'd like to think that I'm knowledgable and more-so every day.

@Jarrod I have answers in 333 tags, most with upvotes. Does that answer your question? Also, I think moderation is less about subject matter and more about site quality. You don't have to know the subject to know a bad question or answer.

@Gilles Absolutely not. The act of writing code is a fraction of what I do. Well, these days, it's an insanely small fraction of what I do. There's plenty of room questions about writing code, tests, and so on. But there's also plenty of room for the whiteboard and soft issues in software development and we here fill that niche.

@MarkTrapp I have been doing a lot of clean up work, and for the most part I enjoy it. As I wrote in my nomination stub, becoming a moderator will allow me to do what I've already been doing with a lot more flexibility. Everything else I love about the site, I can do as a user, so it has nothing to do with my desire to become a moderator.

@kiamlaluno Yes. I've started lurking around MSO a couple of months ago and I got a far better understanding of Stack Exchange than before.

@kiamlaluno Participation on MSO is important for a moderator - that's where the decisions that affect all SE sites are made. I think moderators should keep an eye on the metas of other SE sites that are related to ours to assist with the process of moving questions and guiding users to the right place to get the best answers.

@Gilles I honestly don't feel I can offer my opinion on that matter as I haven't concurrently spent significant time on Programmers and SO. I also did not engage on SO in a serious manner before Programmers came about so I can't offer a true opinion on any changes.

@RebeccaChernoff Thanks for coming everyone! Get out there and vote. There are plenty of awesome candidates, and it was really hard to decide (well, my first vote was easy...). I hope you choose me to be one of the next moderators, but just get out there and get your voice heard.

@RebeccaChernoff I think Programmers is a great site with a garbage problem and an image problem. If elected as moderator I will do everything I can to help with those issues. Particularly tag clean-ups, new user management and pushing toward the launch and continuance of the blog. Communication is the core of what conceptual software is about. It should be the core of what we are too.

@RebeccaChernoff Programmers is a great site and a great addition to the SE network. There is a problem with inconsistency and difference of opinions, but we can work to fix it by being more active in the process either as a user or moderator.

@AnnaLear Leave the question mature for a couple of hours and then come back to it. If there is a satisfactory answer describing my actions, upvote it. If not, provide one describing my actions. If there is community consensus that my actions were incorrect, revert and apologize.

@Jarrod Isn't that why every member is encouraged to participate in the moderation aspects of the site? There are quite a few topics I have no clue about, and when issues arise on those topics I would either refer them to fellow moderators or wait for a sensible amount of flags / votes.